(Former name, former address and former fiscal year, if changed since last report)

Indicate by check mark whether
the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and
(2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90
days. Yes x No ¨

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Date File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule
405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such
files). Yes x No ¨

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See definition of “accelerated filer”,
“large accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):

Large accelerated filer

¨

Accelerated filer

x

Non-accelerated filer

¨

Smaller reporting company

¨

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange
Act.): Yes ¨ No x

Indicate the number of shares outstanding of each of the issuer’s classes of common equity, as of the latest practicable date: Common Stock, $.01 Par Value — 13,186,000 shares outstanding as of
September 4, 2012

The accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with generally accepted
accounting principles in the United States of America (“US GAAP”) for interim financial information and with the instructions to Form 10-Q and Article 10 of Regulation S-X. Accordingly, they do not include all of the information and
footnotes required by US GAAP for complete financial statements. In the opinion of management, all adjustments (consisting of normal recurring accruals) considered necessary for a fair presentation have been included. The preparation of the
Company’s financial statements in conformity with US GAAP necessarily requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at
the balance sheet dates and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting periods. Actual results could differ from these estimates and assumptions. Operating results for the three month period ended July 31, 2012 are not
necessarily indicative of the results that may be expected for the year ending April 30, 2013. For further information, refer to the consolidated financial statements and footnotes thereto for the year ended April 30, 2012 in the
Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K.

2. BUSINESS:

Hi-Tech Pharmacal Co., Inc. (“Hi-Tech” or the “Company”, which may be referred to as “we”, “us”
or “our”), a Delaware corporation, incorporated in April 1982, is a specialty pharmaceutical company developing, manufacturing and marketing generic and branded prescription and OTC products. The Company specializes in the manufacture of
liquid and semi-solid dosage forms and produces a range of sterile ophthalmic, otic and inhalation products. The Company’s Health Care Products division is a developer and marketer of branded prescription and OTC products for the diabetes
marketplace. Hi-Tech’s ECR Pharmaceuticals subsidiary markets branded prescription products.

3. REVENUE RECOGNITION:

Revenue is recognized for product sales upon shipment and passing of title and risk of loss to the customer and when estimates of
discounts, rebates, promotional adjustments, price adjustments, returns, chargebacks, and other potential adjustments are reasonably determinable, collection is reasonably assured and the Company has no further performance obligations. These
estimates are presented in the financial statements as reductions to net revenues and accounts receivable. Contract research income is recognized as work is completed and as billable costs are incurred. In certain cases, contract research income is
based on attainment of designated milestones. Advance payments may be received to fund certain development costs.

Royalty income is related
to sales of divested products which are sold by third parties. For those agreements, the Company recognizes revenue based on royalties reported by those third parties and earned during the applicable period.

4. NET INCOME PER SHARE:

Basic net income per common share is computed based on the weighted average number of common shares outstanding and on the weighted
average number of common shares and share equivalents (stock options) outstanding for diluted earnings per share. The weighted average number of shares outstanding used in the computation of diluted net earnings per share does not include the effect
of potentially outstanding common stock whose effect would have been antidilutive. Such outstanding potential shares consisted of options totaling 482,000 and 0 shares at July 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively.

5. ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE:

We recognize revenue for product sales when title and risk of loss have transferred to our customers, when reliable estimates of
rebates, chargebacks, returns and other adjustments can be made, and when collectability is reasonably assured. This is generally at the time that products are received by our direct customers. Upon recognizing revenue from a sale, we record
estimates for chargebacks, rebates and incentive programs, product returns, cash discounts and other sales reserves that reduce accounts receivable.

Our product revenues are typically subject to agreements with customers allowing chargebacks, rebates, rights of return, pricing
adjustments and other allowances. Based on our agreements and contracts with our customers, we calculate adjustments for these items when we recognize revenue and we book the adjustments against accounts receivable and revenue. Chargebacks,
primarily from wholesalers, are the most significant of these items. Chargebacks result from arrangements we have with end users establishing prices for products for which the end user independently selects a wholesaler from which to purchase. A
chargeback represents the difference between our invoice price to the wholesaler, which is typically stated at wholesale acquisition cost, and the end customer’s contract price, which is lower. We credit the wholesaler for purchases by end
customers at the lower price. Therefore, we record these chargebacks at the time we recognize revenue in connection with our sales to wholesalers.

The reserve for chargebacks is computed in the following manner. The Company obtains wholesaler inventory data for the wholesalers which represent approximately 95% of our chargeback activity. This
inventory is multiplied by the historical percentage of units that are charged back and by the price adjustment per unit to arrive at the chargeback accrual. This calculation is performed by product by customer. The calculated amount of chargebacks
could be affected by other factors such as:

•

a change in retail customer mix

•

a change in negotiated terms with retailers

•

product sales mix at the wholesaler

•

retail inventory levels

•

changes in Wholesale Acquisition Cost (“WAC”)

The Company continually monitors the chargeback activity and adjusts the provisions for chargebacks when we believe that the actual chargebacks will differ from our original provisions.

Consistent with industry practice, the Company maintains a return policy that allows our customers to return product within a specified period. The
Company’s estimate for returns is based upon its historical experience with actual returns. The Company continually monitors its estimates for returns and makes adjustments when it believes that actual product returns may differ from the
established accruals.

Included in the adjustment for sales allowances and returns is a reserve for credits taken by our customers for
rebates, return authorizations and other discounts.

Sales discounts are granted for prompt payment. The reserve for sales discounts is based
on invoices outstanding and assumes that 100% of available discounts will be taken.

Price adjustments, including shelf stock adjustments, are
credits issued from time to time to reflect decreases in the selling prices of our products which our customer has remaining in its inventory at the time of the price reduction. Decreases in our selling prices are discretionary decisions made by us
to reflect market conditions. Amounts recorded for estimated price adjustments are based upon specified terms with direct customers, estimated launch dates of competing products, estimated declines in market price and inventory held by the customer.
The Company analyzes this on a case by case basis and makes adjustments to reserves as necessary.

The Company adequately reserves for
chargebacks, discounts, allowances and returns in the period in which the sales takes place. No material amounts included in the provision for chargebacks and the provision for sales discounts recorded in the current period relate to sales made in
the prior periods. The provision for sales allowances and returns includes reserves for items sold in the current and prior periods. The Company has substantially and consistently used the same estimating methods. We have refined the methods as new
data became available. There have been no material differences between the estimates applied and actual results.

The Company determines
amounts that are material to the financial statements in consideration of all relevant circumstances including quantitative and qualitative factors. Among the items considered is the impact on individual financial statement classification, operating
income and footnote disclosures and the degree of precision that is attainable in estimating judgmental items.

Intangible assets are stated at cost, net of amortization using the straight line method over the expected useful lives of the product
rights, once the related products begin to sell. Amortization expense of the intangible assets for the three months ended July 31, 2012 and 2011 was $1,757,000 and $775,000, respectively. The Company tests for impairment of intangible assets
annually and when events or circumstances indicate that the carrying value of the assets may not be recoverable.

On
June 28, 2011, the Company acquired marketing and distribution rights to several unique branded products for the treatment of pain from Atley Pharmaceuticals. Some products were approved at the time of acquisition and others were subsequently
approved by the Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”). The Company paid $3,220,000 in cash for rights to the products and inventory. Inventory acquired was valued at $298,000. The Company also paid an additional $200,000 for Orbivan® CF during the 2012 fiscal year and $100,000 for Orbivan® with Codeine in the quarter ended July 31, 2012. The Company agreed to pay an additional $355,000 within 180 days, less any amount which has been offset by certain
claims. The Company will pay royalties for certain of these products under a license agreement it has assumed. In July 2011, the Company exercised its option to buy out one of the royalty streams related to one of the products for the amount of
$500,000, which was paid in August 2011. Such amount has been presented as prepaid royalties.

On July 29, 2011, the
Company acquired marketing and distribution rights to an ANDA filing from KVK-Tech, Inc. for dexbrompheniramine maleate 6 mg/pseudoephedrine sulfate 120 mg extended release tablets for $2,000,000. Upon approval from the FDA, the product will be
marketed by ECR Pharmaceuticals, the Company’s branded sales and marketing subsidiary, under the Lodrane®
brand name. The agreement provided for certain amounts to be refunded to Hi-Tech if the product had not been approved by the FDA by certain dates. As of July 31, 2012, the Company had received refunds of $500,000; therefore, the intangible
asset is presented at a $1,500,000 value. The product has not been approved, and the Company may receive further refunds of up to $500,000.

On August 19, 2011, the Company acquired Tussicaps®
extended-release capsules and some inventory from Mallinckrodt LLC (“Mallinckrodt”). The Company paid $11,600,000 in cash at the time of acquisition, has made through July 31, 2012 aggregate quarterly payments of $2,157,000 and may make
additional payments of up to $10,344,000 over the next four years depending on the competitive landscape and sales performance. On the acquisition date, the Company had recorded a preliminary contingent liability of $11,993,000, which was adjusted
to $11,189,000 during the third quarter of fiscal 2012, with the reduction of the contingent liability being offset by a reduction of the related intangible. The fair value of the contingent payment was estimated using the present value of
management’s projection of the expected payments pursuant to the term of the agreement. As of July 31, 2012, the contingent payment liability amounted to $9,519,000, of which $2,875,000 is classified as a current liability. The decrease in
the carrying amount was the result of payment made, offset by the accrual of interest on the outstanding balance.
Tussicaps® is covered by a patent which will expire in September 2024. The Company and Mallinckrodt entered into
a manufacturing agreement pursuant to which Mallinckrodt will manufacture and supply the Tussicaps® products to
the Company for at least seven years.

On November 28, 2011, the Company entered into an asset purchase agreement to acquire an ANDA for
a product and all product intellectual property. The purchase price of the ANDA and interest in the intellectual property is up to $3,000,000, under certain conditions and is payable in installments over 24 months. In connection with this asset
purchase, the Company has entered into a collaboration agreement and profit sharing agreement with another party. The Company and the other party will each own 50% of the product and will each pay equal amounts in satisfaction of the purchase price
obligation. The other party will also pay 50% of the development costs and share in 50% of the net profits. The Company made an initial payment of $375,000 on November 29, 2011. The Company has the right to terminate this agreement at any time
and not pay subsequent installments. Upon termination by the Company, all interests in the assets acquired will be transferred back to the seller.

On March 7, 2012, the Company acquired several homeopathic branded nasal spray products including Sinus Buster® and Allergy Buster® from
Dynova Laboratories, Inc. for $1,344,000 in cash and an additional $1,250,000 deposited in an escrow account to pay for potential expenses. Hi-Tech will also pay a 12% royalty on net sales for 3 1/2 years, or $1,750,000, whichever is reached
first. The brands are being sold through the Company’s Health Care Products OTC division.

The Company entered into a Revolving Credit Agreement, effective as of June 1, 2010, with JPMorgan Chase (the “Revolving
Credit Agreement”). The Revolving Credit Agreement permits the Company to borrow up to $10,000,000 pursuant to a revolving credit note (“Revolving Credit Note”) for, among other things within certain sublimits, general corporate
purposes, acquisitions, research and development projects and future stock repurchase programs. Loans shall bear interest at a rate equal to, at the Company’s option, in the case of a CB Floating Rate Loan, as defined in the Revolving Credit
Agreement, the Prime Rate, as defined in the Revolving Credit Agreement; provided that, the CB Floating Rate shall never be less than the Adjusted One Month LIBOR, or for a LIBOR Loan, at a rate equal to the Adjusted LIBOR plus the Applicable
Margin, as such terms are defined in the Revolving Credit Agreement. The Revolving Credit Agreement contains covenants customary for agreements of this type, including covenants relating to a liquidity ratio, a debt service coverage ratio and a
minimum consolidated net income. Borrowings under the Revolving Credit Agreement mature on May 27, 2013.

If an event of default under
the Revolving Credit Agreement shall occur and be continuing, the commitments under the Revolving Credit Agreement may be terminated and the principal amount outstanding under the Revolving Credit Agreement, together with all accrued unpaid interest
and other amounts owing under the Revolving Credit Agreement and related loan documents, may be declared immediately due and payable.

As of
July 31, 2012, there were no borrowings under the Revolving Credit Agreement.

The Company entered into a $5,000,000 equipment financing
agreement with JPMorgan Chase on June 1, 2010. Loans bear interest at a rate equal to, at the Company’s option, in the case of a CB Floating Rate Loan, as defined in the agreement, the Prime Rate, as defined in the agreement; provided
that, the CB Floating Rate shall never be less than the Adjusted One Month LIBOR, or for a LIBOR Loan, at a rate equal to the Adjusted LIBOR plus the Applicable Margin, as such terms are defined in the agreement. On June 15, 2010the Company
drew down $621,000 of the equipment financing line to fund a down payment for new filling and packaging equipment. On October 13, 2011, the Company borrowed an additional $1,155,000 to finance the remaining payments for the equipment. Total
borrowings under the equipment financing agreement amount to $1,509,000 as of July 31, 2012. Borrowings under the equipment financing agreement mature on October 6, 2016 and require repayments in the amount of approximately $30,000 per
month. In connection with this agreement, the Company has classified $355,000 as current portion of long-term debt.

10. FREIGHT EXPENSE:

Outgoing freight costs amounted to $1,308,000 and $985,000 for the three months ended July 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively, and
are included in selling, general, and administrative expense. Incoming freight is included in cost of goods sold.

11. STOCK-BASED COMPENSATION:

US GAAP requires the measurement and recognition of compensation expense for all share-based payment awards made to employees,
non-employee directors, and consultants, including employee stock options. Stock compensation expense based on the grant date fair value estimated in accordance with the provisions of US GAAP is recognized as an expense over the requisite service
period.

For stock options granted as consideration for services rendered by non-employees, the Company recognizes compensation expense in
accordance with the requirements of the applicable accounting guidance.

The Company’s employee stock options are considered incentive
stock options unless they do not meet the requirements for incentive stock options under the Internal Revenue Code. With incentive stock options, there is no tax deferred benefit associated with recording the stock-based compensation.

The Company recognized stock-based
compensation for awards issued under the Company’s Stock Option Plans and Employee Stock Purchase Plan in the following line items in the condensed consolidated statements of operations:

The Company has elected to use the Black-Scholes option-pricing model, which incorporates various assumptions including volatility,
expected life, and interest rate. The expected volatility is based on the historical volatility of the Company’s common stock. The interest rates for periods within the contractual life of the award are based on the United States Treasury yield
on the date of each option grant. The expected term of options represents the period that the Company’s stock-based awards are expected to be outstanding and was determined based on historical experience and vesting schedules of similar awards.

All options granted through July 31, 2012 had exercise prices equal to the fair market value of the stock on the date of grant, a
contractual term of ten years and generally a vesting period of four years. In accordance with US GAAP the Company adjusts share-based compensation on a quarterly basis for changes to the estimate of expected equity award forfeitures based on actual
forfeiture experience. The effect of adjusting the forfeiture rate for all expense amortization after May 1, 2006 is recognized in the period the forfeiture estimate is changed. As of July 31, 2012, the weighted average forfeiture rate was
9% and the effect of forfeiture adjustments for the three months ended July 31, 2012 and 2011 was insignificant. On July 16, 2012the Company granted 442,000 options to directors and employees for an exercise price of $32.59. The Company
did not grant any options during the three months ended July 31, 2011.

The intrinsic value of options exercised for the Amended and
Restated Stock Option Plan, the 2009 Stock Option Plan and the 1994 Directors Stock Option Plan, as amended was $1,736,000 and $583,000 for the three month periods ended July 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively. As of July 31, 2012,
$10,352,000 of total unrecognized compensation cost related to stock options for both plans is expected to be recognized over a weighted average period of 3.1 years.

12. PRODUCT DIVESTITURES:

On July 3, 2009the Company entered into an agreement whereby the Company has granted the marketing rights to certain nutritional
products previously marketed by our division, Midlothian Laboratories (“Midlothian”), in exchange for a series of payments totaling $1,000,000 over the course of one year. In addition, the Company received a royalty on the sales of these
products, not to exceed $1,500,000 per year for three years ended June 30, 2012. Royalty income earned under this agreement amounted to $54,000 and $110,000 for the three months ended July 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively. The Company
retained this royalty stream when it divested its Midlothian business.

Effective May 1, 2011, the Company divested Midlothian in
exchange for a cash payment of $1,700,000. No gain or loss was recognized on the divesture as the Company had recorded an impairment charge of approximately $1,300,000 at April 30, 2011. The Company retained marketing and distribution rights to
generic buprenorphine sublingual tablets, an ANDA that is filed with the FDA, an ANDA that is in development and a royalty stream from products previously divested, as discussed above. Metrics, Inc. acquired Midlothian from the Company.

13. INCOME TAXES:

The Company estimated its effective tax rate to be approximately 33% for the year ending April 30, 2013. The decline in the
effective tax rate compared to the prior period is due to a higher benefit from the domestic production activities tax credit and the exercise of stock options in the current period. On May 1, 2008, the Company adopted the provisions of ASC
Topic 740-10, “Income Taxes” relating to recognition thresholds and measurement attributes for the financial statement recognition and measurement of a tax position taken or expected to be taken in a tax return. The Company has elected an
accounting policy to classify interest and penalties related to unrecognized tax benefits as interest expense. At July 31, 2012 and April 30, 2012, the Company did not have any amount recorded for uncertain tax positions. The Company is no
longer subject to U.S. federal, state or local income tax examination for years ended prior to April 30, 2008.

14. CONTINGENCIES AND OTHER MATTERS:

[1] Government regulation:

The Company’s products and facilities are subject to regulation by a number of Federal and State governmental agencies. The Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”), in particular, maintains
oversight of the formulation, manufacture, distribution, packaging and labeling of all of the Company’s products. The Drug Enforcement Administration (“DEA”) maintains oversight over the Company’s products that are considered
controlled substances.

On March 2, 2011, the FDA indicated in its MedWatch publication that the FDA
removed approximately 500 currently marketed cough/cold and allergy related products including Lodrane®
products. Three of these were marketed by ECR Pharmaceuticals under the brand name Lodrane®. ECR Pharmaceuticals
stopped shipping these products as of August 31, 2011. Sales of Lodrane® products amounted to approximately
$0 and $2,400,000 for the three months ended July 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively.

On October 3, 2011 through October 19,2011, the Company was subject to an inspection by the FDA. The inspection resulted in seven observations on Form 483, an FDA form on which deficiencies are noted after an FDA inspection, with inspector observations. The Company responded
to those observations on November 7, 2011 and believes that its response to these observations was adequate.

[2] Legal
Proceedings:

On June 8, 2012, plaintiff Mathew Harrison, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated, brought a class action lawsuit, Civil Action No. 12-2897, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York, against Wayne Perry, Dynova Laboratories, Inc., Sicap Industries, LLC, Walgreens Co. and the Company, alleging,
among other things, that their Sinus Buster® products are improperly marketed, labeled and sold as homeopathic
products, and that these allegations support claims of fraud, unjust enrichment, breach of express and implied warranties and alleged violations of various state and federal statutes. The Company answered the complaint on July 17, 2012,
and asserted cross-claims against the other defendants, except Walgreens which was dismissed from the case. The Company believes the complaint is without merit and intends to vigorously defend against the allegations in the complaint. The
Company cannot predict the outcome of the action.

On May 16, 2012, plaintiff David Delre, on behalf of himself and
all others similarly situated, brought a class action lawsuit, Civil Action No. 12-2429, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York, against Wayne Perry, Dynova Laboratories, Inc., Sicap Industries, LLC, and the Company,
alleging, among other things, that their Sinus Buster® products are improperly marketed, labeled and sold as
homeopathic products, and that these allegations support claims of fraud, unjust enrichment, breach of express and implied warranties and alleged violations of various state and federal statutes. The Company answered the complaint on
June 26, 2012, and asserted cross-claims against the other defendants. The Company believes the complaint is without merit and intends to vigorously defend against the allegations in the complaint. The Company cannot predict the outcome of
the action.

On June 1, 2012, the Company received a notice to preserve documents and electronically stored information in conjunction
with a confidential civil investigative demand under the Texas Medicaid Fraud Prevention Act, Texas Human Resources Code, §36.001, et seq. relating to the submission of prices to Texas Medicaid in claims for reimbursement for prescription
drugs. The Company has no estimate at this time of its potential exposure and cannot, at this time, predict the outcome of this matter.

On
March 13, 2012, Allergan, Inc. (“Allergan”) filed a complaint against the Company in the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina in response to the Company’s Paragraph IV certifications in its ANDA
for Bimatoprost Topical Solution 0.03%, alleging infringement of U.S. Patents Nos. 8,038,988 for Allergan’s product, Latisse. On April 11, 2012the Company answered the complaint. The Company believes the complaint is without merit
and intends to vigorously defend against the allegations in the complaint. The Company cannot predict the outcome of the action.

On
May 16, 2012, Allergan filed a complaint against the Company in the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina in response to the Company’s Paragraph IV certifications in its ANDA for Bimatoprost Topical
Solution 0.03%, alleging infringement of U.S. Patents Nos. 8,101,161 for Allergan’s product, Latisse. The Company answered the complaint on June 14, 2012. The Company believes the complaint is without merit and intends to vigorously defend
against the allegations in the complaint. The Company cannot predict the outcome of the action.

On January 27, 2012,
Allergan filed a complaint against the Company in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas for infringement of U.S. Patent No. 7,851,504 (“Enhanced Bimatoprost Ophthalmic Solution,” issued December 14, 2010)
following a Paragraph IV certification as part of the Company’s filing of an ANDA to manufacture a generic version of Allergan’s Lumigan® 0.01%. On February 23, 2012, the Company answered the complaint. The Company believes the complaint is without merit and intends to vigorously defend
against the allegations in the complaint. The Company cannot predict the outcome of the action.

On August 17, 2011, Allergan and Duke University filed a complaint against the Company in the United
States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina in response to the Company’s Paragraph IV certifications in its ANDA for Bimatoprost Topical Solution 0.03%, alleging infringement of U.S. Patents Nos. 7,351,404; 7,388,029; and
6,403,649 for Allergan’s product, Latisse. On October 7, 2011, the Company answered the complaint asserting counterclaims. The plaintiffs responded to the counterclaims on October 31, 2011. The claims with respect to U.S. Patent
No. 6,403,649 for Allergan’s product were dismissed on February 1, 2012. The Company believes the complaint is without merit and intends to vigorously defend against the allegations in the complaint. The Company cannot predict the
outcome of the action.

On October 31, 2011, Senju Pharmaceutical Co.; Kyorin Pharmaceutical Co.; and Allergan filed
a complaint in the District Court of Delaware, Civil Action No. 1:11-cv-01059, in response to the Company’s Paragraph IV certification as part of its filing of an ANDA to manufacture a generic version of Allergan’s Zymar® (gatifloxacin ophthalmic solution, 0.3% ). The complaint alleges infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 6,333,045
(“Aqueous Liquid Pharmaceutical Composition Comprised of Gatifloxacin,” issued on December 25, 2001) and 5,880,283 (“8-Alkoxyquinolonecarboxylic Acid Hydrate With Excellent Stability And Process For Producing The Same,”
issued March 9, 1999), licensed to Allergan. On December 16, 2011, the Company answered the complaint. On August 28, 2012, the claims on U.S. patent No. 5,880,283 were dismissed. The Company believes the complaint is without
merit and intends to vigorously defend against the allegations in the complaint. The Company cannot predict the outcome of the action.

On October 11, 2011, Senju Pharmaceutical Co.; Kyorin Pharmaceutical Co.; and Allergan filed a complaint in the District Court of Delaware, Civil Action No. 1:11-cv-00926; in response to the
Company’s Paragraph IV certification as part of its filing of an ANDA to manufacture a generic version of Allergan’s Zymaxid® (gatifloxacin ophthalmic solution, 0.5%). The complaint alleges infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 6,333,045 (“Aqueous Liquid Pharmaceutical Composition Comprised
of Gatifloxacin,” issued December 25, 2001) and 5,880,283 (“8-Alkoxyquinolonecarboxylic Acid Hydrate With Excellent Stability and Process for Producing the Same,” issued March 9, 1999), licensed to Allergan. On
December 16, 2011, the Company answered the complaint. On August 28, 2012, the claims on U.S. patent No. 5,880,283 were dismissed. The Company believes the complaint is without merit and intends to vigorously defend against the
allegations in the complaint. The Company cannot predict the outcome of the action.

On February 9, 2010, in the United States District
Court for the District of Massachusetts (the “Federal District Court”), a “Partial Unsealing Order” was issued and unsealed in a civil case naming several pharmaceutical companies as defendants under the qui tam provisions of the
federal civil False Claims Act (the “Qui Tam Complaint”). The qui tam provisions permit a private person, known as a “relator” (sometimes referred to as a “whistleblower”), to file civil actions under this statute
on behalf of the federal and state governments. Pursuant to the Order, a Revised Corrected Seventh Amended Complaint was filed by the relator and unsealed on February 10, 2010. The relator in the Complaint is Constance A.
Conrad. The Complaint alleges that several pharmaceutical companies submitted false records or statements to the United States through the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (“CMS”) and thereby caused false claims for payments
to be made through state Medicaid Reimbursement programs for unapproved or ineffective drugs or for products that are not drugs at all. The Complaint alleges that the drugs were “New Drugs” that the FDA had not approved and that are
expressly excluded from the definition of “Covered Outpatient Drugs”, which would have rendered them eligible for Medicaid reimbursement. The Complaint alleges these actions violate the federal civil False Claims Act. The Revised
Corrected Seventh Amended Complaint did not name the Company as a defendant.

On February 9, 2010, the Court also unsealed the
“United States’ Notice of Partial Declination” in which the government determined not to intervene against 68 named defendants, including the Company. On July 23, 2010, the relator further amended the Complaint, which, as
amended, named the Company, including a subsidiary of the Company, as a defendant. On January 6, 2011, the Court issued an order unsealing the government’s notice of election to intervene as to a previously unnamed defendant. On
July 25, 2011, the Court issued an order stating, among other things, that all parties agreed that the only defendant against whom the United States has elected to intervene is the previously unnamed defendant. On July 26, 2011, the
relator filed its Tenth Amended Complaint, which removed the allegations against the Company’s subsidiary, but not the Company, realleging them against another party. The Company intends to vigorously defend against the remaining
allegations in the relator’s Complaint. The Company cannot predict the outcome of the action.

The Company’s ECR Pharmaceuticals subsidiary currently leases approximately 12,000 square feet in Richmond, VA. This lease ends August 31, 2014.

In June 2010, the Company entered into an agreement to lease a parking lot in Amityville, NY. The Company will pay $90,000 over a five year period.

In the course of its business, the Company enters into agreements which require the Company to make royalty payments which are generally
based on net sales or gross profits of certain products.

In connection with the Tussicaps® acquisition, the Company entered into a manufacturing agreement which requires the Company to make a minimum
purchase of $500,000 in the first year and $1,000,000 per year over the next four years.

15. RECENT ACCOUNTING PRONOUNCEMENTS:

In December 2011, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) updated the accounting guidance relating to offsetting
assets and liabilities in financial statements. The updated guidance requires companies to disclose both gross and net information about both instruments and transactions eligible for offset in the statement of financial position and instruments and
transactions subject to an agreement similar to a master netting arrangement. The updated guidance is effective for the Company beginning in the third quarter of fiscal year 2013. The adoption of this guidance is not expected to have a material
impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

In July 2012, the FASB issued accounting guidance to simplify the testing for
a drop in value of indefinite-lived intangible assets. Under the updated guidance, an entity has the option of first performing a qualitative assessment to determine whether it is more likely than not that an indefinite-lived intangible asset
is impaired before proceeding to the quantitative impairment test under which it would calculate the asset’s fair value. When performing the qualitative assessment, the entity must evaluate events and circumstances that may affect the
significant inputs used to determine the fair value of the indefinite-lived intangible asset. This guidance is effective for annual and interim impairment tests performed for fiscal years beginning after September 15, 2012. Early
adoption is permitted. We do not expect this guidance to have a material impact on our financial statements.

16. SIGNIFICANT CUSTOMERS AND CONCENTRATION OF CREDIT RISK:

For the three months ended July 31, 2012, four customers, McKesson, Cardinal Health, Walgreens and AmerisourceBergen, accounted for net
sales of approximately 23%, 15%, 13% and 12%, respectively. These customers represented approximately 75% of accounts receivable at July 31, 2012. For the three months ended July 31, 2011, three customers, McKesson, AmerisourceBergen and Cardinal
Health, accounted for net sales of approximately 15%, 11% and 10%, respectively. These customers represented approximately 62% of accounts receivable at April 30, 2012.

The Company maintains cash and cash equivalents primarily with major financial institutions. Such amounts exceed FDIC limits.

17. FAIR VALUE MEASUREMENTS:

The accounting guidance under ASC “Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures” (“ASC 820-10”) utilizes a fair
value hierarchy that prioritizes the inputs to valuation techniques used to measure fair value into three broad levels. A brief description of those levels is as follows:

•

Level 1: Observable inputs such as quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities.

•

Level 2: Inputs other than quoted prices that are observable for the asset or liability, either directly or indirectly

The fair value of the contingent payment liability was estimated using the present value of management’s
projection of the expected payments pursuant to the term of the Tussicaps® agreement (see Note 8). The present
value of the contingent liability was computed using a discount rate of 5.2%.

The carrying value of certain financial instruments such as
cash and cash equivalents, accounts receivable and accounts payable approximate their fair values due to their short-term nature of their underlying terms. The carrying value of the long-term debt approximate its fair value based upon its variable
market interest rates, which approximates current market interest.

18. SEGMENT INFORMATION:

The Company operates in three reportable business segments: generic pharmaceuticals (referred to as “Hi-Tech Generics”), OTC
branded pharmaceuticals (referred to as “Health Care Products”, or “HCP”) and prescription brands (referred to as “ECR”). Branded products are marketed under brand names through marketing programs that are designed to
generate physician and consumer loyalty. Generic pharmaceutical products are the chemical and therapeutic equivalents of corresponding brand drugs. Our Chief Operating Decision Maker is our Chief Executive Officer.

The business segments were determined based on management’s reporting and decision-making requirements in accordance with FASB ASC 280-10 Segment
Reporting. The generic products represent a single operating segment because the demand for these products is mainly driven by consumers seeking a lower cost alternative to brand name drugs. Certain of our expenses, such as the direct sales force
and other sales and marketing expenses and specific research and development expenses, are charged directly to the respective segments. Other expenses, such as general and administrative expenses are included under the Corporate and other cost
center.

MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

This Report on Form 10-Q and certain information incorporated herein by reference contain forward-looking statements which are not historical facts made pursuant to the “safe harbor” provisions
of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Forward-looking statements are not promises or guarantees and investors are cautioned that all forward-looking statements involve risks and uncertainties, including but not limited to the
impact of competitive products and pricing, product demand and market acceptance, new product development, the regulatory environment, including without limitation, reliance on key strategic alliances, availability of raw materials, fluctuations in
operating results and other risks detailed from time to time in the Company’s filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. These statements are based on management’s current expectations and are naturally subject to uncertainty and
changes in circumstances. We caution you not to place undue reliance upon any such forward-looking statements which speak only as of the date made. Hi-Tech is under no obligation to, and expressly disclaims any such obligation to, update or alter
its forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.

Net sales of Hi-Tech generic pharmaceutical products decreased primarily due to lower sales of Fluticasone Propionate
nasal spray which decreased to $22,000,000 from $26,200,000 in the comparable quarter as the Company sold more units at a lower average price. In January 2012, a fourth competitor entered the generic Fluticasone Propionate nasal spray market which
may lead to additional price reductions for this product. The Company also experienced lower volumes and prices on Dorzolamide products during the quarter ended July 31, 2012. Partially offsetting these declines were sales of new products such
as Lidocaine sterile jelly, launched in September 2011, Nystatin oral suspension, launched in February 2012 and Lidocaine 5% ointment, launched in March 2012.

Net sales of the Health Care Products division, which markets the Company’s branded OTC products, decreased due to end customer discounts and promotional pricing on Nasal Ease®. Sales of Multibetic®, Diabetiderm®, and Diabetic
Tussin® declined as well. These declines were partially offset by sales of our new product Sinus Buster®, acquired in March 2012.

Net sales of ECR Pharmaceuticals, which sells branded prescription products, declined due to the discontinuation of Lodrane® extended release antihistamines. ECR Pharmaceuticals stopped shipping the Lodrane® products as of August 31, 2011. Sales of the discontinued Lodrane® products amounted to approximately $2,400,000 for the three months ended July 31, 2011. Increased sales of
Bupap® and Dexpak® and sales from newly acquired
Tussicaps® and Orbivan® partially offset the decrease in sales for the period.

The increase in cost of goods sold as a percentage of net sales is primarily due to pricing declines for both Fluticasone
Propionate nasal spray and Dorzolamide ophthalmic products. The Company anticipates that the cost to manufacture Fluticasone Propionate nasal spray will decline in the second half of the fiscal year due to lower input costs and new manufacturing
equipment which will enable productivity improvements. Additionally, consumer discounts lowered margins in the HCP division.

The increase in selling, general and administrative expenses was primarily due to 30
contract sales representatives hired in October 2011 in the ECR subsidiary to expand its sales force to new areas of the country. These 30 representatives were terminated at the end of July 2012.

Amortization expense increased due to intangible asset purchases over the last year including Tussicaps®, purchased in August 2011 and Sinus Buster®, purchased in March 2012.

The increase in Research and Development expenditures is
due to increased spending on internal projects for the generic division, which include four projects that require clinical trails. Three of these projects requiring clinical trails were undertaken in partnership with other companies. Spending
included licensing fees and expenses paid to third parties for the new project requiring clinical trails.

Royalty income was relatively flat,
but will decrease in the future as royalties on sales of certain products divested by its previously owned Midlothian division came to an end in June 2012.

The effective tax rate declined to approximately 33% from 34% as the Company recorded a higher benefit from the exercise of stock options in the current period.

Shares outstanding increased due to the exercise of options and the current year stock option grant.

LIQUIDITY AND CAPITAL RESOURCES

The
Company’s operations are historically financed principally by cash flow from operations. At July 31, 2012 and April 30, 2012, working capital was approximately $177,504,000 and $167,565,000, respectively, an increase of $9,939,000
during the three months ended July 31, 2012.

Cash flows provided by operating activities were approximately $4,043,000 which is
primarily due to net income in the period and a decrease in accounts receivable. Accounts payable decreased by $6,927,000 due to the timing of payments for raw materials.

Cash flows used in investing activities were $1,310,000 and were mostly for capital expenditures primarily related to capacity expansion at the Company’s Amityville and Copiague facilities.

Cash flows provided by financing activities of $1,969,000 related primarily to the proceeds from exercise of stock options and the related
tax benefits.

The Company believes that its financial resources consisting of current working capital and anticipated future operating
revenue will be sufficient to enable it to meet its working capital requirements for at least the next 12 months. Additionally, the Company has a $10,000,000 revolving line of credit with JPMorgan Chase which remains undrawn, and an additional
$3,491,000 of the equipment financing line from JPMorgan Chase. The revolving line of credit agreement expires May 27, 2013, while borrowings under the equipment line mature October 6, 2016.

REVOLVING CREDIT FACILITY

The Company
entered into a Revolving Credit Agreement, effective as of June 1, 2010, with JPMorgan Chase (the “Revolving Credit Agreement”). The Revolving Credit Agreement permits the Company to borrow up to $10,000,000 pursuant to a revolving
credit note (“Revolving Credit Note”) for, among other things within certain sublimits, general corporate purposes, acquisitions, research and development projects and future stock repurchase programs. Loans shall bear interest at a rate
equal to, at the Company’s option, in the case of a CB Floating Rate Loan, as defined in the Revolving Credit Agreement, the Prime Rate, as defined in the Revolving Credit Agreement; provided that, the CB Floating Rate shall never be less than
the Adjusted One Month LIBOR, or for a LIBOR Loan, at a rate equal to the Adjusted LIBOR plus the Applicable Margin, as such terms are defined in the Revolving Credit

Agreement. The Revolving Credit Agreement contains covenants customary for agreements of this type, including covenants relating to a liquidity ratio, a debt service coverage ratio and a minimum
consolidated net income. Borrowings under the Revolving Credit Agreement mature on May 27, 2013.

If an event of default under the
Revolving Credit Agreement shall occur and be continuing, the commitments under the Revolving Credit Agreement may be terminated and the principal amount outstanding under the Revolving Credit Agreement, together with all accrued unpaid interest and
other amounts owing under the Revolving Credit Agreement and related loan documents, may be declared immediately due and payable.

The Company
also entered into a $5,000,000 equipment financing agreement with JPMorgan Chase on June 1, 2010. This agreement has similar interest rates. On June 15, 2010the Company drew down $621,000 of the equipment financing line to fund a down
payment for new filling and packaging equipment. On October 13, 2011, the Company borrowed an additional $1,155,000 to finance the remaining payments for the equipment. Total borrowings under the equipment financing agreement amount to
$1,509,000 as of July 31, 2012. Borrowings under the equipment financing agreement are payable in monthly installments of $30,000 through October 6, 2016.

The Company may not declare or pay dividends or distributions, other than dividends payable solely in capital stock, so long as the Revolving Credit Note remains unpaid.

RECENT ACCOUNTING PRONOUNCEMENTS:

In
December 2011, the FASB updated the accounting guidance relating to offsetting assets and liabilities in financial statements. The updated guidance requires companies to disclose both gross and net information about both instruments and transactions
eligible for offset in the statement of financial position and instruments and transactions subject to an agreement similar to a master netting arrangement. The updated guidance is effective for the Company beginning in the third quarter of fiscal
year 2013. The adoption of this guidance is not expected to have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

In July 2012, the FASB issued accounting guidance to simplify the testing for a drop in value of indefinite-lived intangible assets. Under the
updated guidance, an entity has the option of first performing a qualitative assessment to determine whether it is more likely than not that an indefinite-lived intangible asset is impaired before proceeding to the quantitative impairment test under
which it would calculate the asset’s fair value. When performing the qualitative assessment, the entity must evaluate events and circumstances that may affect the significant inputs used to determine the fair value of the indefinite-lived
intangible asset. This guidance is effective for annual and interim impairment tests performed for fiscal years beginning after September 15, 2012. Early adoption is permitted. We do not expect this guidance to have a material
impact on our financial statements.

SEASONALITY

The Company’s largest selling product is Fluticasone Propionate nasal spray, an allergy medication. Sales of Fluticasone Propionate nasal spray vary from quarter to quarter due to the stronger demand
for the product during the spring and fall allergy seasons. The Company also sells cough, cold and flu products which have historically experienced stronger net sales in September through March. The cough, cold and flu season in the late 2011 and
early 2012 period was particularly mild. Allergy seasons and cough, cold and flu seasons vary from year to year and because of these changes in product mix and product seasonality, period-to-period comparisons within the same fiscal year are not
necessarily meaningful and should not be relied on as indicative of future results.

CRITICAL ACCOUNTING POLICIES

In preparing financial statements in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States of America, we are required to make
estimates and assumptions that affect reported amounts of assets and liabilities and the disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and revenues and expenses for the reporting period covered thereby. As a
result, these estimates are subject to an inherent degree of uncertainty. We base our estimates and judgments on our historical experience, the terms of existing contracts, our observance of trends in the industry, information that we obtain from
our customers and outside sources, and on various assumptions that we believe to be reasonable and appropriate under the circumstances, the results of which form the basis for making judgments which impact our reported operating results and the
carrying values of assets and liabilities. These assumptions include but are not limited to the percentage of new products which may have chargebacks and the percentage of items which will be subject to price decreases. Actual results may differ
from these estimates.

Revenue recognition and accounts receivable, adjustments for returns and price adjustments, allowance for doubtful
accounts and carrying value of inventory represent significant estimates made by management.

Revenue Recognition and Accounts
Receivable: Revenue is recognized for product sales upon shipment and when title and risk of loss is passed to the customer and when estimates of discounts, rebates, promotional adjustments, price adjustments, returns, chargebacks, and other
potential adjustments are reasonably determinable, collection is reasonably assured and the Company has no further

performance obligations. These estimates are presented in the financial statements as reductions to net revenues and accounts receivable. Estimated sales returns, allowances and discounts are
provided for in determining net sales. Contract research income is recognized as work is completed and billable costs are incurred. In certain cases, contract research income is based on attainment of designated milestones.

Royalty income is related to the sale or use of our products under license agreements with third parties. For those agreements where royalties are
reasonably estimable, the Company recognizes revenue based on estimates of royalties earned during the applicable period.

Adjustments for
Returns and Price Adjustments: Our product revenues are typically subject to agreements with customers allowing chargebacks, rebates, rights of return, pricing adjustments and other allowances. Based on our agreements and contracts with our
customers, we calculate adjustments for these items when we recognize revenue and we book the adjustments against accounts receivable and revenue. Chargebacks, primarily from wholesalers, are the most significant of these items. Chargebacks result
from arrangements we have with retail customers establishing prices for products for which the end user independently selects a wholesaler from which to purchase. A chargeback represents the difference between our invoice price to the wholesaler,
which is typically stated at wholesale acquisition cost, and the end customer’s contract price, which is lower. We credit the wholesaler for purchases by end customers at the lower price. Therefore, we record these chargebacks at the time we
recognize revenue in connection with our sales to wholesalers.

The reserve for chargebacks is computed in the following manner. The Company
obtains wholesaler inventory data for the wholesalers which represent approximately 95% of our chargeback activity. This inventory is multiplied by the historical percentage of units that are charged back and by the price adjustment per unit to
arrive at the chargeback accrual. This calculation is performed by product for each customer.

The calculated amount of chargebacks could be
affected by other factors such as:

•

A change in retail customer mix

•

A change in negotiated terms with retailers

•

Product sales mix at the wholesaler

•

Retail inventory levels

•

Changes in Wholesale Acquisition Cost (WAC)

The Company continually monitors the chargeback activity and adjusts the provisions for chargebacks when we believe that the actual chargebacks will differ from our original provisions.

Consistent with industry practice, the Company maintains a return policy that allows our customers to return product within a specified period. The
Company’s estimate for returns is based upon its historical experience with actual returns. While such experience has allowed for reasonable estimation in the past, history may not always be an accurate indicator of future returns. The Company
continually monitors its estimates for returns and makes adjustments when it believes that actual product returns may differ from the established accruals.

Included in the adjustment for sales allowances and returns is a reserve for credits taken by our customers for rebates, return authorizations and other.

Sales discounts are granted for prompt payment. The reserve for sales discounts is based on invoices outstanding and assumes that 100% of available
discounts will be taken.

Price adjustments, including shelf stock adjustments, are credits issued from time to time to reflect decreases in
the selling prices of our products which our customer has remaining in its inventory at the time of the price reduction. Decreases in our selling prices are discretionary decisions made by us to reflect market conditions. Amounts recorded for
estimated price adjustments are based upon specified terms with direct customers, estimated launch dates of competing products, estimated declines in market price and inventory held by the customer. The Company analyzes this on a case by case basis
and makes adjustments to reserves as necessary.

The Company adequately reserves for chargebacks, discounts, allowances and returns in the
period in which the sales takes place. No material amounts included in the provision for chargebacks and the provision for sales discounts recorded in the current period relate to sales made in the prior periods. The current provision for sales
allowances and returns includes reserves for items sold in the current period, while the ending balance includes reserves for items sold in the current and prior periods. The Company has substantially and consistently used the same estimating
methods. We continue to refine the methods as new data becomes available. There have been no material differences between the estimates applied and actual results.

The Company determines amounts that are material to the financial statements in consideration of all
relevant circumstances including quantitative and qualitative factors. Among the items considered is the impact on individual financial statement classification, operating income and footnote disclosures and the degree of precision that is
attainable in estimating judgmental items.

The following table presents the roll forward of each significant estimate as of July 31,2012 and July 31, 2011 and for the three months then ended, respectively.

Allowance for Doubtful Accounts: We have historically provided credit terms to customers in accordance with what
management views as industry norms. Financial terms for credit-approved customers are generally on either a net 30, 60 or 90 day basis, though most customers are entitled to a prompt payment discount. Management periodically and regularly reviews
customer account activity in order to assess the adequacy of allowances for doubtful accounts, considering factors such as economic conditions and each customer’s payment history and creditworthiness. If the financial condition of our customers
were to deteriorate, or if they were otherwise unable to make payments in accordance with management’s expectations, we would have to increase our allowance for doubtful accounts.

Inventories: We state inventories at the lower of average cost or market, with cost being determined based upon the average method. In evaluating whether inventory is to be stated at cost or
market, management considers such factors as the amount of inventory on hand, estimated time required to sell existing inventory and expected market conditions, including levels of competition. We establish reserves for slow-moving and obsolete
inventories based upon our historical experience, product expiration dates and management’s assessment of current product demand.

Intangible Assets:The Company’s intangible assets consist primarily of acquired product rights. Intangible assets are stated at cost and
amortized using the straight line method over the expected useful lives of the product rights. We regularly review the appropriateness of the useful lives assigned to our product rights taking into consideration potential future changes in the
markets for our products. The Company reviews each intangible asset with finite useful lives for impairment by comparing the undiscounted cash flows of each asset to the respective carrying value. The Company performs this impairment testing when
events occur or circumstances change that would more likely than not reduce the undiscounted cash flows of the asset below its carrying value.

As part of our ongoing business, we
do not participate in transactions that generate relationships with unconsolidated entities or financial partnerships which would have been established for the purpose of facilitating off-balance sheet arrangements or other contractually narrow or
limited purposes. As of July 31, 2012 we are not involved in any material unconsolidated transactions.

ITEM 3.

QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK

The Company invests in U.S. treasury notes, government asset backed securities and corporate bonds, all of which are exposed to interest rate fluctuations. The interest earned on these investments may
vary based on fluctuations in the market interest rate.

Under the
supervision and with the participation of the Company’s management, including the Company’s Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, the Company has evaluated the effectiveness of the design and operation of its disclosure
controls and procedures within 90 days of the filing date of this quarterly report, and, based on their evaluation, the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer have concluded that these disclosure controls and procedures are effective.
There were no significant changes in our internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affect these controls subsequent to the date of their evaluation.

PART II. OTHER INFORMATION

ITEM 1.

LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

The disclosure under
Note 14, Contingencies and Other Matters, Legal Proceedings, included in Part I of this report, is incorporated in this Part II, Item 1 by reference.

ITEM 1A.

RISK FACTORS

Not applicable

ITEM 2.

UNREGISTERED SALES OF EQUITY SECURITIES AND USE OF PROCEEDS

There were no sales of equity securities during the quarter ended July 31, 2012 that were not registered under the Securities Act of 1933.

ITEM 3.

DEFAULTS UPON SENIOR SECURITIES

None

ITEM 4.

MINE SAFETY DISCLOSURES

Not Applicable

ITEM 5.

OTHER INFORMATION

None

ITEM 6.

EXHIBITS

(a)

Exhibits

31.1

Rule 13A-14(a)/15D-14(a) Certification

31.2

Rule 13A-14(a)/15D-14(a) Certification

32

Certification of Officers Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2003